User talk:Kiske

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Kiske, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. If you would like to experiment with Wikipedia, I personally invite you to do so in my own sandbox (just follow the simple rules!). Again, welcome! — ßottesiηi Tell me what's up 19:18, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ordinary World

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Ordinary World, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=33:8zrz202i05na. As a copyright violation, Ordinary World appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Ordinary World has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Ordinary World. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Ordinary World, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia.

Matt Eason 19:34, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I only pasted the information from the website because I wanted to read about the Duran Duran Hit Ordinary World. Because there was no Ordinary World Article I decided to create my own. I am sorry I did not revise it and change it inot my own words but I didn't have the time. Nevertheless I thank your for your help and I apologize for the inconvenience this may have caused you. Kiske

[edit] about eurasia

I Reverted your changes because they looked very much like original research. I know it's not my article but if you're going to make extensive additions at least ry to remember to cite your sources. My main reason for calling it original research was the use of the word we when making certain points--Acebrock

to avoid a revert war I stuck {{unreferenced}} onto the article instead of reverting it.--Acebrock

Thank you for not reverting the article. I didn't cite sources because all the conclusions stated in the article have come from deductions that I have made ragrding the continent at hand. What I have written are very likely conclusions and I never say that they aare the truth, I always state that they are "very likely", "most likely" or "probably" and support my answer with information, but I have never affirmed something as if it was true in the entire article. But I thank you once more for not reverting it. Maybe we can work together to make the article better. Regarfs Kiske 19:21, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought that the whole article sounded extremely POV so I rewrote it maintaining the information you added and making it sound much more NPOV throughout. also I added a single {{fact}} tag regarding Eurasia's capital since Eurasia is in no danger of being conquered according to the book.--Acebrock 00:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Double1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Double1.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Narcissism Topic Deletions

Kirske. You state as your reason for removing, in the intro, the reference to many decades of psychiatric and psychological study and research into narcissism, regarding it being a part of a normal healthy psyche. This is not POV and it IS (at the least) a solidly Western cultural world view. It is also objective, based on thousands of studies. It is not a matter of my feelings or personal beliefs. I feel entirely neutral about the issue.

Additionally, it is true that in severe cases of narcissism, where it causes a great deal of problems in functioning in social, business and family relationships, it is an outcome of childhood abuse. Abuse can be physical or emotional. Abuse can also be caused by ignoring the child and treating it as an extension of one's hopes and dreams, loving too much, spoiling too much, and giving the child a falsely propped up sense of self.

A minor short paragraph or two giving an ultra-brief explanation of the other aspects of the word, which are intrinsically tied in to the cultural sense of the word, is necessary to lay the foundation of the article. It is as relevant to a discussion of the subject of the cultural sense of narcissism as is the referece to Greek mythology. Did you, by any chance, pause to check out the talk page Talk:Narcissism? If you have, then you will have noted why the links are embedded within the text of articles --- they are specificaly for people to find out more about the subject and increase their understanding of what is being talked about.

Now I agree that this topic is yet a stub of a few random topics lumped together, and that the intro also needs a discussion of what cultural narcissism truly means. Instead, what is available now is merely a mishmash of topics. It also needs a thoughtful categorizing.

I am glad to see you so concerned about the topic, but one should not delete in a topic where they have no knowledge of the subject, merely POV and emotional reaction. What should be done is to either click the links and learn more, or post your complaints to the talk page Talk:Narcissism. There you can present YOUR POV and ask for feedback.

Going about deleting on the basis of POV is no better than going about creating topic copy based on POV. So come back and chat, don't delete. Such deletions border on pure vandalism and are time consuming to correct. Perhaps you will have time to do the necessary revisions? Thank you - I am Kiwi 09:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

sorry for incomplete sentences. I am sick and not at my best. The copy on this talk page has some corrections, but maybe vastly more accidents. See here and join conversation. Perhaps you might be instrumental in making this a very good topic. Narcissism Talk page -I am Kiwi 09:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stalin

Stalin was not leader of the Soviet Union by law, a position which would be held by the President, latterly Kalinin. Stalin's only official post was General Secretary of the Communist Party. If you consider the label 'dictator' POV this would also have to be applied to other leaders of his ilk, most notably Hitler. I cannot allow your political prejudice to rewrite history. White Guard 04:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your admission. Actually I did not intentionally rewrite what you wrote, merely reverted to the reference to Stalin as a dictator; I apologise if this also eliminated some other factual amendments.

Now, for your main point. I did not, as you allege, describe you as a 'political activist', and I have to say that this is the first time that I have ever heard of anyone considering such a label as 'a personal offence' and an attack. If you reread what I have written above you will see quite clearly that I 'accused you', if accusation is the right word, of political prejudice in your attempts to avoid Stalin being referred to as a 'dicatator', which, as a label, is historically accurate and generally understood. We all have political prejudice of one kind or other: I suspect yours to be Communist-though I confess I may be wrong; mine are right-wing and libertarian. I would, however, never allow my particular perspective to distort the search for historical truth and simple objectivity. You say that many people in Eastern Europe do not believe Stalin to have been a dictator? I say that even more know that he was, having lived through those appalling times, which I think you probably did not. You were born and raised in the DDR? Well, I lived there for a time and remember both the climate of fear and moral decay, both sure signs of political tyranny. I know the article is 'not mine', and I would never wish to make it so; but I will not have history rewritten. At the moment I am busy fighting a Neo-Nazi on the Adolf Hitler page; it's sad that I have to fight for the truth on the Stalin page also. If I lose on Stalin I also lose on Hitler. I will set out on the Stalin talk page at greater length my reasons for believing why this man has to be labeled as a dicatator. I am sorry to upset you; but please do not consider my criticism of you and others as a personal attack, which it most definately is not. White Guard 22:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I have now set out my reasoning on the Stalin page why he has to be included in the dictator category.

Anyway, thanks for your detailed response. I completely agree that Stalin and Hitler should be treated with historical objectivity; and I also believe that 'dictator' is an objective, not a subjective term. It's a question of how power is both held and used. To define Hitler as a dictator and not Stalin is, I maintain, a demonstration of political prejudice; and it is that which I 'accused' you of, not 'revisionism'. Best to be clear about these things. Your views are different from mine; but that is not a problem for me. I would hate to live under any system that determined a single legitimate political outlook. You are a Communist, or sympathetic to Communism? That's fine; I can live with that. I hate Communism because it challenges the personal freedom I hold most dear; but I do not expect you to share my view. I feel sure you will agree with me when I say that Hitler was a dictator; to try to elimainate a similar description of Stalin-whether you agree or not-is politically and philosphically dangerous. I dare say that there were those close to Stalin who have positive views of him; but this is also true of Hitler. And to be perfectly honest with you I have heard more positive assessments of Hitler in Germany than I have of Stalin in Russia, and I know both countries well. Everything you say about Stalin could also be said about Hitler. To defend the one and condemn the other puts you in an impossible position, in danger of losing all moral authority. Please do not misunderstand me; I do not mean this in any offensive sense. However, to say that, from this point of hsitory, that Stalin only stands condemned because of the 'right wing media' is disingenuous in the extreme. Might I suggest you read Varlam Shalamov's Kolyma Tales?

I am sorry for your experiences of 'political transition', which I know can be painful; and I too have seen, and admired, Goodbye Lenin. But freedom always comes at a price, and I think you-or your children anyway-will be better off in the long run under capitalism than under socialism. I know Cuba well, and have seen too many ruined lives ever to have a positive view of 'socialism' The prevailing slogan in Havana is Socialism or Death. I met several people-some as young as twenty-who said they would prefer death. Sad. Maybe you will return to Communism in the east, though I doubt it. Time will heal the divisions. You and I can at least be civilized, and simply agree to differ. I may hate your views, but will defend to the death your right to have them. White Guard 01:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:DOUBL2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:DOUBL2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Globalising Narcissism

INTERESTING...and my mind is totally open to this (I just never thought of it before)...any chance of you explaining on talk page what specifics you have in mind? So we can start working on it? --Zeraeph 10:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warned for personal attack

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

For this - [1]:

"Please, this is the last time I am going to try to convince you of this...If you don't understand...you are mentally retarded and I will be forced to create an editing war and change Dictator every chance I get in this encyclopedia."

Merzbow 19:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Your response on my talk page speaks for itself. If you continue to think you are justified in calling people retarded, you'll find yourself blocked. - Merzbow 21:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warning about your reverting of the article Joseph Stalin

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. At any rate please do not do more than three reverts in a 24h period. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Heimstern Läufer 21:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The above block is also related to violation of WP:NPA. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bass

If Mark Knoppfler or however its spelt pitches between F2-D4 he is a bass. Please could you refrain from being derogatory towards a living person? They're not going to like derogatory comments about them on the internet. I don't even like Dire Straits but you could at least be less insulting about vocal ranges. F2-D4 is close to 2 octaves, which is the average operatic vocal range. Go check the world book encyclopedia on that. I would doubt he's showing you his entire range either, he's probably got some stashed away, as a singer's working range tends to differ from their actual range. Also F2 is satisfyingly low for a bass - if it sounds good he's likely a good bass, I myself go down to E2 but i don't have a good timbre there as I need to develop that but my A2 is pitch perfect. So in conclusion - tread carefully, only Mariah carey and the odd woman here and there has much more than 2 octaves. Tenor/High baritone range is just a different area of the voice, Many Baritone's/Tenors do not possess more than 2 octaves. --I'll bring the food 02:05, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Also many rock basses have fantastic timbre - Eddie Vedder, for instance.--I'll bring the food 02:07, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Eddie Vedder doesn't go above F and is most comfortable in the A2-C4 range. Atypical contemporary bass territory.--I'll bring the food 02:40, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
And he has fantastic break up around C4 as he hits his first break.--I'll bring the food 02:41, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rock music Wikiproject invitation

Hello WikiProject Metal member.
WikiProject Metal music is important in expanding encyclopedic coverage of the metal. It brings attention to the lesser-known bands, and significantly improves the quality of the famous ones. Five Featured articles and two formers is proof of that.
This is the stuff I wish to achieve with the somewhat recently resurrected WikiProject Rock music. I hope to also attract attention to rock music articles of all sorts, and hopefully change some to GA or FA status. I invite you to come join us, and embrace the links between metal and rock music in general.
Rock on.
-- Reaper X 04:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lol, Stalin apologist

Anyone in this day and age who disputes the fact that Stalin was a tyrant who killed millions of innocent people belongs is in the same camp as holocaust deniers. I happen to have relatives who suffered under Stalin, and can verify stories of the horrible things he had done. But obviously they were fascist Nazi collaborators who deserved to die, right? Or at least they probably were in the opinion of bullshit-spewing Marxist historical revisionists with no common sense or ability to think beyond communist dogma. It honestly is shocking to me that people still believe Marxism is a valid political philosophy; it should have died out after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Marxist theory is fundamentally flawed: the modern proletariat was a product of the Industrial Revolution, and as such cannot truthfully be applied to a general theory of history. --BlarghHgralb 05:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding the Joseph Stalin article

Per your comments on my own talk page, I checked out the Stalin article and the point of debate around it. For starters, I think that referring to Stalin as a "dictator" is probably reasonable due to the multiple definitions of the term. Merriam-Webster cites three definitions for dictator - obviously the first one does not conform to Stalin, and the third, which actually states that a dictator should normally have an "oppressive" rule, is debatable. The second, however, merely defines dictator as "one holding complete autocratic control." Ultimately, during Stalin's rule (or "reign"?), I feel this would be an accurate definition of where his power ended up.

The other matter I see in debate is the argument over the citation of Soviet sources. It's easy to see why this is a touchy subject due to how publications and press in Soviet Russia never enjoyed the sort of freedom that the American press wields. Even so, I don't think Soviet sources should be discounted entirely... just cited carefully. Perhaps a new subheading in the Stalin article would be in order? Something along the lines of "Soviet Portrayal" or "As Viewed by Communist Scholars." Then, the section could explain the differing point of view while at the same time citing the concern that printed materials were often controlled at the time. If you think this is a valid direction to go, I might bring it up on the talk page for Stalin.

(Incidentally, I notice that the current mention on the Stalin page of censorship in the USSR provides no citation for that widely held belief. As such, I've added "citation needed" notes to this.) --Bishop2 13:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../k/i/s/User_talk%7EKiske_be49.html"